A look at events leading to the disclosure that the Internal Revenue Service placed conservative groups under special scrutiny for 18 months before the 2012 elections, a practice that has prompted congressional inquiries and a Justice Department criminal investigation:

2010:

March-April: IRS agents begin giving extra attention to tax-exempt applications from groups associated with the tea party or with a political sounding agenda in their names, such as "Patriots," ''Take Back the Country" or "We the People," according to the IRS inspector general.

August: The first IRS "BOLO" listing — meaning Be on the Lookout — is issued for "various local organizations in the Tea Party movement" that are seeking tax-exempt status.

___

2011:

June: Lawmakers send the first of at least eight letters asking the IRS to address complaints that conservative groups are being subjected to burdensome screening in their applications for tax-exempt status.

June 29: Lois G. Lerner, in charge of overseeing tax-exempt organizations at the IRS, learns at a meeting that groups are being targeted, according to the inspector general. Lerner is told that groups with "Tea Party," ''Patriot" or "9/12 Project" in their names were being red-flagged. Statements in case files that are critical of the country's leadership or that want to "make America a better place to live" also prompt examination. Lerner directs agents to change the criteria for flagging groups immediately, the inspector general says.

Dec. 16: Despite being briefed about the matter six months earlier, Lerner does not divulge the flagging of conservative groups when she and others from the IRS meet staff members of the House Ways and Means Committee to discuss the issue, according to the staff's timeline of events.

___

2012:

January: The criteria for screening, altered after Lerner's staff meeting six months earlier, is modified again. Now the IRS is on the lookout for references to the Constitution or Bill of Rights in the materials of organizations seeking tax-exempt status, for "political action type organizations involved in limiting/expanding government," and more.

March 22: IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman tells Congress there is "absolutely no targeting" of groups based on their political views.

May: Lerner does not divulge the flagging in 45-page letters to two lawmakers inquiring about the issue.

May 3: Deputy Commissioner Steven Miller is told by staff that that applications for tax-exempt status by tea party groups were inappropriately singled out for extra scrutiny, according to the agency. (Miller now is acting commissioner.)

June 15: Miller responds to a letter from Rep. Charles Boustany, R-La., who had raised concerns about possible harassment of tea party groups by the IRS. Miller does not concede conservatives had been singled out. He says generally that the IRS is seeing more tax-exempt applications from politically active groups and taking steps to "coordinate the handling of the case to ensure consistency."

July 25: Miller testifies to the House Ways and Means oversight subcommittee but does not divulge what he was told in May about the screening of tea party groups.

Sept. 11: Millers writes a letter responding to Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee but again does not own up to the scrutiny conservatives were placed under. Hatch had written three times to the IRS about the complaints.

Nov. 6: The presidential and congressional elections.

Nov. 15: Lerner and others from the IRS meet Ways and Means staff but again do not acknowledge the targeting.

___

2013:

Week of April 22: White House counsel learns that the inspector general is finishing a report about the IRS office in Cincinnati, which handles tax-exempt applications, according to White House spokesman Jay Carney.

May 10: Lerner apologizes on behalf of the IRS for "inappropriate" targeting of conservatives; White House counsel is said to receive inspector general's report; President Barack Obama is said to have heard of the matter for the first time. Lerner says no high-level officials were aware of the targeting, a statement seemingly at odds with the timeline of events, and blamed low-level employees in Cincinnati.

May 13: Obama says if the IRS intentionally went after conservatives, that's "outrageous." The Democratic-controlled Senate Finance Committee joins Republican-led House committees in planning fresh investigations of the matter.

May 14: Miller says his agency demonstrated "a lack of sensitivity" in trying to figure out whether organizations claiming a tax exemption met the standard for it. The Justice Department says it will conduct a criminal investigation, the inspector general's report is released, and Obama calls the findings "intolerable and inexcusable."

May 15: In congressional testimony, Attorney General Eric Holder says the FBI's investigation could include potential civil rights violations, false statements and potential violations of the law prohibiting federal employees from engaging in some partisan political activities.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for
following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and
comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are
automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some
comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules,
click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

Both sides are filled with slimeballs. Each side likes to think they are better than the other. Both are wrong. That's politics. That's why it's funny. Funnier still are people who think this will bring down Obama. Funnier STILL are people on this board (not in this thread) who are calling for a new election. You know the guy. He likes to compare Obama to that guy with the funny mustache.

"March 22: IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman tells Congress there is "absolutely no targeting" of groups based on their political views."

The problems started under Shulman's watch who was appointed by George W. Bush. So a Republican appointee failed to due his job and the heat fell upon the acting commissioner Miller.

Every "Tea Party" or "right leaning" group were eventually given their tax exempt status. Only a left leaning group, "Emerge America", was denied. Other lean leaning groups were targeted as well but the only ones being talked about are those that are on the right.

There is no evidence nor has there been any testimony given that would implicate President Obama, his cabinet or staff. I'm sure the Republicans will do nothing more in the upcoming weeks than try to find someone somewhere that has either talked to the president at some time in their life or waved at him who might have cleaned an IRS office or something and claim that he or she was an Obama plant and was the cause of this mess. I'm sure Fox (News) will provide 24 hour coverage once this janitor or maid is found.

I just listened to a lady from some Texas Tea Party group that applied for tax exempt status and after about 15 months the IRS responded by sending 15 pages of ridiculous and complicated questions to fill out and the group is still waiting. They were contacted by a lawyer who is now assisting them.

The reason I am not being more specific is because I just heard it on Greta Van Susteren and didn't pay attention to details etc. You can diss FOX News all you want to but I believe this lady is credible.

There may be some groups, both left and right, that have had their tax exempt applications held up but name me a right leaning group that has had their application denied? The only group that has had their application denied has been the left leaning group "Emerge America"?

All of these "groups" should be denied since they do not fall under the section 501 (c) guidelines.

“There are two IRS scandals. The other is the IRS allowing big shadowy forces to meddle in elections anonymously through front groups that file false statements with the IRS,” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., said on the Senate floor Wednesday.

Wrong again. How many times does that make now? I'm fairly certain it's quite a few.

Using your logic if a general screws up on the battlefield it would be President's Obama's fault. If an electrician shorts out the White House it would be President Obama's fault. Get the picture?

I wouldn't blame George Bush, but you bringing up poor George seems like desperation. Why don't you take the advice that you and other meat-heads always throw out and get over your BDS problem.

"I can give you assurances. We pride ourselves in being a nonpolitical, nonpartisan organization," said Shulman, who was appointed by President George W. Bush. "There is absolutely no targeting. This is the kind of back and forth that happens when people apply for 501(c)(4) status."

Now who are we to believe? Those who are now trying to use this to try to score political points for 2014 and 2016 or the Commissioner of the IRS who was in charge when all of this took place?

I agree that Benghazi, AP and the IRS screw-ups should be investigated, but these investigations should be ones looking to ascertain what made them screw-ups and not for political witch hunts. If Republicans want to, once again, go down that road then they might see results similar to Clinton's midterms and not the usual historical ones that sees the party in power lose seats.

So, what say you meat-head? Still want to play the, "if this had been George Bush", game?

Absolutely the President would be responsible hence the title Commander-in-Chief; it is the Presidents military title. Regardless of who is sitting in the White House, we all should be concerned about the serious lack of leadership displayed across various segments of our government. If the President didn't know, he should have known but if he didn't he should have taken decisive action at his point of knowledge, not wait to see how it played out in the polls. That will be his downfall.

It's about accepting responsibility and taking action to prevent a reoccurrence at this point not about bringing anyone down since downfall isn't necessarily a removal. The sad part about it is that Reagan probably didn't remember for a medical reason but even on his worst day could make better decisions. He couldn't have cared less about political cover unlike the current administration. It will affect Obama at some point.

And that was taken advantage of. As for Obama, the people who don't like him will continue to do so and the people who DO like him will like him just a little less. Like I said before, heads will roll, but Obama will go on.

Well it didn't, but it will now. You'll just have to be satisfied with that. If not, well, I don't know what to tell you. Oh, and for those people who want Obama's resignation, that ain't gonna happen, either.

"They" tried to say that he wasn't a citizen of the United States but that failed.
"They" tried to use his family history against him and that failed.
"They" called him a Muslim denigrating all Muslims in the effort but that failed.
They said he really didn't go to this or that University and demanded his college transcripts (something that has never been asked from any president I can remember) and that failed.
"They" said he was hiding stuff in his tax returns(although "they" hypocritically gave Romney a pass) and that failed.
"They" criticized him for making a prediction on the economy that didn't pan out since the problem was worse than was known at the time (and getting worse even before he took office) and that failed.
"They" criticized him for bowing to some foreign leaders although presidents from both parties have done so without comment but that failed.
"They" even criticized and complained about what he wanted on a hamburger and that failed.
"They" criticized him for sending his children to a private school even though this too has been done by presidents from both parties and that failed.
"They" called him a fascist, a communist, a socialist and SATAN himself but that failed.
"They" called him weak on terrorism but that failed.
"They" criticized him for having a couple of marines hold umbrellas during a speech when it was raining even though presidents going back decades have done the same and that failed.
"They" criticized him for pulling out of Iraq too soon; a conflict we should have never entered in the first place but that failed.
"They" criticized him for the bad economy he inherited and complained when it proved to be slow in recovering even when they offered no solutions only obstructionism and that failed.
"They" criticized him for his Supreme Court appointments but that failed.
"They" criticized him for the AP scandal even though no evidence points to any culpability on his part and that's going to fail.
"They" blame him for the mistakes and possible criminal acts of underlings way down the chain in which no former president would been held even remotely responsible and those have failed.
"They" blame him for getting passed the Affordable Care Act"; a health care program for the masses which has been offered by presidents from both parties going all the way back to Teddy Roosevelt and it passed and was upheld as Constitution but "they" are still trying to get it overturned or defunded and those attempts have failed (37 times and counting).

And on and on and on it goes as "they" do absolutely nothing but collect their government welfare checks and then [filtered word] and complain as "they" set records for the fewest days on the job.

"They" are slowly but surely making "themselves" out to look like do-nothing fools which could very well come back to bite them in the [filtered word] in 2014 and 2016.

If this happens "they" won't have any one to blame except themselves and their pathological obsession with this particular president as perfectly demonstrated by those who stated that they have but only one goal and that was to make Obama a one term president and of course we saw what happened. That too failed.

What about what he said? He promise to cut the deficit in half - He said he'd have the most transparent administration in history - he promised to “eliminate entirely” income tax for seniors making less than $50,000 - He said his only involvement with Acorn was doing some stuff with the justice department - He said his father served in World War II - He said the public will have 5 days to look at every bill that lands on his desk - He said he'd make it “Impossible” for Congressmen to slip in Pork Barrel Projects - He said where there are meetings where laws are written they will be more open to the public - He promised to walk the picket line if workers are denied the right to bargain - He promised to close Guantanamo Bay and end torture - He said if I liked the healthcare plan I have, I can keep it - He said we got back every dime we used to rescue the banks with interest - He said he would faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of his ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Some pretty bizarre but true statements. I'm sure we could expand the list since you like them and we could theoretically make lists about every President in history. We have a government that is not protecting it's citizens and lying to them about it. Recent scandals point to a serious breakdown in leadership at all levels. If you know anything about history - America is on a fast downward spiral to a second class country and you suggest we should just ignore it because "they" have failed? You actually believe that there is a good side in all of this mess? They said you'd say that!

Those who claim that the President knew nothing you might what to start reading the Huffington Post - Yes, they are reporting that the Chief of Staff and other Top White Staffers knew a month ago. Now they want us to believe that nobody said anything to the President! A few days ago - nobody knew anything?